Publishers force Overdrive to change public library lending

[Whitecat5000]

---

KingAl wrote:

---

geertm wrote:

Publishers (one in particular) force Overdrive to change public library lending.

Interesting Mobileread thread:

http://www.mobileread.com/forums/showthread.php?t=122994

---

If you scroll down to the bottom of page 2 of this thread, a post by Giggleton 2/25/11 at 1:05 AM (probably Eastern) has an attachment of a letter from Overdrive to libraries which states the same things the thread is talking about. At first glance, it appears to be genuine.

---

http://www.libraryjournal.com/lj/home/889452-264/harpercollins_caps_loans_on_ebook.html.csp

Here's what I could find.  I don't like it.  I know that I've been over #26 on a waiting list for loaning before. 

[Arctic_Ranger]

Morning all,

After reading this yesterday I decided to contact HarperCollins as well as a few other publishers and let them know how I felt.  I am not expecting a dramatic turn around in their decisions, but it can't hurt to try.  Maybe if enough of their customers contact them they will notice.   Below I'll post a copy of what I sent.  Please notice that I didn't threaten to stopy buying from them.   I tried to be polite and just express what I was feeling.

Dear HarperCollins,
I have just read about your new policy on e-books for libraries that limits the circulation to 26 lendings.  I am very disappointed by this decision and others that HarperCollins and other publishers have made over the last year regarding e-books.

My wife and I both own Nooks from Barnes&Noble.  I have always thought that the restriction that publishers put on lending of only for two weeks for the my lifetime ownership of the book was ridiculous.  I realize there needs to be some restrictions but a 30 days per year policy would seem much more sensible and in line with most peoples lending habits.

Just so you know what demographic I fall into:  I am 40, the father of three, work as a scientist and also volunteer chaplain at a hospital.  My wife and I homeschool our children.  So yes, we use the library a LOT.  But we also buy anywhere between 40-50 books a year as a family.  Sometimes even more.

What is frustrating me is that it seem as if the publishing industry has learned nothing from what has happened in the music industry over the last 10 years.  People bought expensive MP3 players, bristled at the restrictions placed on them, piracy was rampant and then the music business learned they could be profitable AND customer friendly.

So can the publishing houses.  Look a little bit long term, ease up on these draconian tactics.  Hurting libraries and e-book lending is NOT going to drive more people to buy e-books or print books.  If I can't borrow a book from the library via my Nook, I'll just drive down the street and check out the print copy.  I'll still buy the books I was going to buy anyway.

I hope instead of viewing this e-mail as whining and complaining, you choose to see it how I intended it-as advice from a customer about how a change of attitude could save all of us a lot of frustration and animosity.


Matt

[tgibbs]

I first learned of this via my local librarian who is a Facebook Friend and put something about this yesterday on her FB.  She was pretty upset about it as I'm sure lots are.  To be honest I wasn't even sure our local library offered Ebooks, but it seems they do. Hopefully, with folks willing to voice their opinions to the publishers in ways such as the above post, a solution that everyone can be happy with can be found.

Tammie

Island of Secrets 

[ellsbells930]

It's like they are trying to "kill" the ebook business.   The books I borrow from the library are ones that I never intend to purchase.  If I can't get them from the library, I just won't read them - or wait to get them for $1 from a library sale in DTB version.

[Doug_Pardee Distinguished Bibliophile]

David Weinberger, one of the authors of The Cluetrain Manifesto, blogged about this in his Joho the Blog:

I don’t see how this scheme could make sense to a publisher unless the publisher had given up on books as a primary way we build a culture together. If you cared about books as vehicles of ideas and not just vehicles of commerce, you would have dismissed with contempt an idea that treats them as evanescent as chatter on a call-in show.

[Commentary: like most everybody else, the publishers figured that the cluetrain wasn't going toward their destination. Weinberger should be disappointed but not surprised.]

[ABthree]

---

ellsbells930 wrote:

It's like they are trying to "kill" the ebook business.   The books I borrow from the library are ones that I never intend to purchase.  If I can't get them from the library, I just won't read them - or wait to get them for $1 from a library sale in DTB version.

---

Not kill -- even the dimmest publishing executive knows that it's too late for that.  But cripple?  Yeah, probably.

Publishers see their business as selling paper, glue and ink, exactly the way that P&G sees their business as selling soap.  (No intent here to insult P&G -- they're far more forward thinking and adept at marketing than any publishing house.)  To them, printing isn't one way of several to get a book out;  it's intrinsic to the industry.  If it's not on paper, it isn't really a book; everything else is just a distraction, and the more that it can be discouraged, the better.

Seen from that point of view, every action taken up to now by the publishers -- draconian limits on Lend-Me, prohibition of text-to-voice, Agency pricing for eBooks, and now the library limitation -- is perfectly logical.  Perverse, but logical.

From any other point of view, their actions are just insane.  I don't think that they're insane, just hopelessly blinkered.

[froggles]

---

ellsbells930 wrote:

It's like they are trying to "kill" the ebook business.   The books I borrow from the library are ones that I never intend to purchase.  If I can't get them from the library, I just won't read them - or wait to get them for $1 from a library sale in DTB version.

---

I'm just the opposite: I essentially never buy books w/o first checking out the author or even the series itself at the library.  I read so fast,  I need to know it's something I'll come back to time after time before it makes sense to buy. 

So by limiting the number of copies my library can afford, they're reducing the chances that I'll ever see their books and therefore, that I'll ever buy them.  And the stupid thing is that the library has a fixed budget, so they're not going to make one cent more this way! 

Seems like publishers would do better thinking of library books as publicity and offering libraries special deals.   I wrote to them to tell them all of this, but I fear it won't make much impact.....

[ellsbells930]

froggles - We are approaching it from different directions, but the end result is going to be the same.... we aren't going to be purchasing the books.

[ellsbells930]

I like the letter arctic_ranger wrote to H-C.  But I got to thinking today..... I may find H-C authors that I like & write to them.  I'll tell them that due to the stance their publisher has taken on ebooks & libraries, that I will no longer be purchasing or reading their books.  There are plenty of other authors out there.  If the authors get enough of that kind of feedback, they will put pressure on the publishers.